Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28177433›Full record

ReviewAnnals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology2017

Next steps in immuno-oncology: enhancing antitumor effects through appropriate patient selection and rationally designed combination strategies.

A K S Salama, S J Moschos

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

28 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 55 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

A K S SalamaDivision of Medical Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
S J MoschosDivision of Hematology-Oncology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, USA.
Duke Medical Center · USUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · US

Funding

Virology Research Program (Program 4)P30CA016086 · NCI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI David Darr · 1985 to 2026
$201.5M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016086
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Cancers escape immune surveillance via distinct mechanisms that involve central (negative selection within the thymus) or peripheral (lack of costimulation, receipt of death/anergic signals by tumor, immunoregulatory cell populations) immune tolerance. During the 1990s, moderate clinical benefit was seen using several cytokine therapies for a limited number of cancers. Over the past 20 years, extensive research has been performed to understand the role of various components of peripheral immune tolerance, with the co-inhibitory immune checkpoint molecules cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 (CTLA-4), programmed death 1 (PD-1), and its ligand (PD-L1) being the most well-characterized at preclinical and clinical levels. Patients and methods: We used PubMed and Google Scholar searches to identify key articles published reporting preclinical and clinical studies investigating CTLA-4 and PD-1/PD-L1, frequently cited review articles, and clinical studies of CTLA-4 and PD-1/PD-L1 pathway inhibitors, including combination therapy strategies. We also searched recent oncology congress presentations and clinicaltrials.gov to cover the most up-to-date clinical trial data and ongoing clinical trials of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) combinations. Results: Inhibiting CTLA-4 and PD-1 using monoclonal antibody therapies administered as single agents has been associated with clinical benefit in distinct patient subgroups across several malignancies. Concurrent blockade of CTLA-4 and components of the PD-1/PD-L1 system using various schedules has shown synergy and even higher incidence of durable antitumor responses at the expense of increased rates of immune-mediated adverse events, which can be life-threatening, but are rarely fatal and are reversible in most cases using established treatment guidelines. Conclusions: Dual immune checkpoint blockade has demonstrated promising clinical benefit in numerous solid tumor types. This example of concurrent modulation of multiple components of the immune system is currently being investigated in other cancers using various immunomodulatory strategies.

Indexed as

Antibodies, MonoclonalAntineoplastic Agents, ImmunologicalAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsB7-H1 AntigenClinical Trials as TopicCTLA-4 AntigenHumansNeoplasmsPatient SelectionProgrammed Cell Death 1 ReceptorRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTumor EscapeAntibodies, MonoclonalAntineoplastic Agents, ImmunologicalB7-H1 AntigenCD274 protein, humanCTLA-4 AntigenCTLA4 protein, humanPDCD1 protein, humanProgrammed Cell Death 1 Receptor

Identifiers

PMID28177433
PMCPMC6887913
OpenAlexW2530004119

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.